What is the ruling on prayer and fasting when a woman experiences a brownish discharge (kudra) before menstruation, if its connection to menstruation is a future matter whose time of onset is unknown, and is the dryness of the vaginal area for an hour or two after the discharge considered a break in its connection to menstruation if it reappears?

There are sayings of the people of knowledge regarding the brownish discharge (Kudrah) before menstruation: 1. It is considered menstruation absolutely. 2. It is not considered menstruation absolutely. 3. If it occurs during the accustomed period, accompanied by menstrual pain, and is followed by blood, then it is menstruation; otherwise not.

According to the third opinion: If a woman is accustomed to the brownish discharge appearing before the blood, accompanied by pain and connected to the blood, she refrains from prayer. If it stops and is not followed by blood, she makes up the prayers she missed. If she is not accustomed to this, she does not refrain from prayer. If it is then followed by blood, she knows it is menstruation and makes up the fasts. "If a young girl sees blood at a time suitable for it to be menstruation… she refrains from fasting and praying… Then, if it stops for less than the minimum period of menstruation, it becomes clear that it was blood of corruption, so she repeats what she missed of prayer" (Al-Zarkashi).

What is well-known among jurists is that brownish discharge during the menstrual period is menstruation without the condition of pain or the connection of blood. This opinion offers leniency.

And the opinion that brownish discharge is not considered menstruation and that the criterion is the emission of blood, is a strong opinion, and it is what Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen's view settled upon.